Early Impressions: Marcus Pettersson

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
I don't think his passing is "bad", it's just not that good. Considering his defensive struggles, you need to pair him with a strong DFD, and puck moving DFD aren't exactly common. My biggest problem with Oleksiak is that he plays way softer than he should, Johnson is way more physical than Oleksiak is despite Oleksiak having 5 inches and 30 lbs on Johnson. If Oleksiak had Johnson's physicality, he'd be an absolute monster and very few people would be complaining about him.

My concern is that Gonchar isn't the type of coach that will teach him how to be a physical defenseman, he'll be the kind of coach that turns him into a PMD instead of building on his strengths
. You'll be left with what Oleksiak is right now, a guy who has okay puck moving talents and doesn't use his massive size. I would rather see Oleksiak be a worse puck mover and a physically imposing defenseman, I don't think he'll become that though.

Pettersson doesn't currently have the body to be an effective physical defenseman - so Gonchar teaching him to be a PMD is the best possible thing for the team and for Pettersson.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImporterExporter

BrokenStick

Registered User
Feb 8, 2004
768
225
Ellwood City, PA
The guy has stopped the hemorrhage that is Jack Johnson.

For that alone he was worth Sprong. Do we have any other young players we can trade to make Maata play like he did as a rookie?

Pettersson may spend the next five years stapled to Johnson's left side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Riptide

Dipsy Doodle

Rent A Barn
May 28, 2006
76,528
21,072
Pettersson's been fairly reliable. Nothing flashy, and he makes some mistakes, but like people are saying he's been better than Oleksiak, Maatta, and JJ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EightyOne

Doogle

Registered User
Jun 8, 2010
599
465
Like JJ, Maata, and Oleksiak, he's an ideal 5 who can fill in as a 4. But the difference is, the blemishes to his game aren't huge detriments to his defensive ability. He could use more size and and I wish he could shoot, but at least he's not an idiot, slow as a snail, or incapable of completing a pass like the other three I mentioned. Those are things that can really hurt you on defense.
 

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
91,427
73,617
San Diego, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
Like JJ, Maata, and Oleksiak, he's an ideal 5 who can fill in as a 4. But the difference is, the blemishes to his game aren't huge detriments to his defensive ability. He could use more size and and I wish he could shoot, but at least he's not an idiot, slow as a snail, or incapable of completing a pass like the other three I mentioned. Those are things that can really hurt you on defense.

I don’t see a ton of blemishes to be honest. I see over engagement by a rookie. I think him and Schultz potentially could be a really nice pairing.

Question is what is our bottom pairing then? I’d take Maatta and Riikola light years before Johnson - Riikola.
 

Brandinho

deng xiaoping gang
Aug 28, 2005
14,804
1,405
República de Cuba
I don’t see a ton of blemishes to be honest. I see over engagement by a rookie. I think him and Schultz potentially could be a really nice pairing.

Question is what is our bottom pairing then? I’d take Maatta and Riikola light years before Johnson - Riikola.

Maatta and JJ fight to the death, winner gets traded.

In all seriousness, Pettersson seems fine to me. Doubt he'll ever be a player that I can get excited about, but he's also not a guy who I think will be unable to contribute as a #4/5 and he's young enough that he could be a bit more in time. Maatta is too deficient in key areas and Johnson doesn't belong in the NHL at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Soggy Biscuit

Ms Maggie

Registered User
Apr 11, 2017
2,759
1,869
Once again, it´s a shame how they mishandled Sprong. It was looking hopeless with him and I was afraid he would be traded for crap.. but this return is quite solid under those bad circumstances. MP is nothing flashy, but I would say he is easily our 3rd best dman now. Might be 4th when Schultz returns and plays well, but right now, thanks god for MP. Our blueline is horrible after Letang and Dumo, so having a young reliable dman like MP there definitely helps. I like him. Still need more of those dmen tho. At least one more and we will be fine.
Agree. Think there's some upside potential with him.
 

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
91,427
73,617
San Diego, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
Maatta and JJ fight to the death, winner gets traded.

In all seriousness, Pettersson seems fine to me. Doubt he'll ever be a player that I can get excited about, but he's also not a guy who I think will be unable to contribute as a #4/5 and he's young enough that he could be a bit more in time. Maatta is too deficient in key areas and Johnson doesn't belong in the NHL at all.

Weird. Letang is my favorite Penguin, but players that play a steady, solid game like Dumo or Pettersson are my second favorite. It’s nice to see.

I thought Maatta was like that in 15-16, but ever since he’s just been a huge wild card.
 

Doogle

Registered User
Jun 8, 2010
599
465
I don’t see a ton of blemishes to be honest. I see over engagement by a rookie. I think him and Schultz potentially could be a really nice pairing.

Question is what is our bottom pairing then? I’d take Maatta and Riikola light years before Johnson - Riikola.

His blemishes are his lack of strength along the boards and his limp and inaccurate shot. Neither one of those traits kills us, but if he fixed both of those things he could be a very good player instead of merely a very decent player.
 

Brandinho

deng xiaoping gang
Aug 28, 2005
14,804
1,405
República de Cuba
Weird. Letang is my favorite Penguin, but players that play a steady, solid game like Dumo or Pettersson are my second favorite. It’s nice to see.

I thought Maatta was like that in 15-16, but ever since he’s just been a huge wild card.

I like those kinds of players from a personnel perspective, obviously, but it's not something that really excites me to watch. Maatta probably could have been one of those players if he could skate and/or had a less chaotic development cycle. The latter wouldn't have fixed the former, but it would probably have ironed out some of Maatta's other flaws.
 

Pens1566

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
18,376
7,215
WV
I think he's been invisible, but in a good way. Like you really don't notice anything great or bad. Except saving that goal last night.
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
80,382
77,967
Redmond, WA
He does play well with Johnson. I think he'd play well with Schultz. I think he's a decent middle pair defenseman or a very good bottom pair guy.

I don't know if he's there yet, but he definitely has this kind of potential. I'd keep him and Johnson stapled together for as long as I can, they complement each other super well and it's the first D partner that Johnson has looked legitimately good with.
 

Peat

Registered User
Jun 14, 2016
29,282
25,205
Looks decent enough so far.

Come on, don't drive me to drinking at 12:30 PM. I was about to go on a bike ride, please do not fuel my alcoholism with such comments :laugh:

Would this be a good time to point out that only Lovejoy has a lower GA/60 in the playoffs for us since 15/16 than Maatta? :laugh:

I don't think his passing is "bad", it's just not that good. Considering his defensive struggles, you need to pair him with a strong DFD, and puck moving DFD aren't exactly common. My biggest problem with Oleksiak is that he plays way softer than he should, Johnson is way more physical than Oleksiak is despite Oleksiak having 5 inches and 30 lbs on Johnson. If Oleksiak had Johnson's physicality, he'd be an absolute monster and very few people would be complaining about him.

My concern is that Gonchar isn't the type of coach that will teach him how to be a physical defenseman, he'll be the kind of coach that turns him into a PMD instead of building on his strengths. You'll be left with what Oleksiak is right now, a guy who has okay puck moving talents and doesn't use his massive size. I would rather see Oleksiak be a worse puck mover and a physically imposing defenseman, I don't think he'll become that though.

I don't think there's any coach out there that can fix either Oleksiak's lack of aggression or poor passing. Players very rarely improve their technical skills or attitude at that age.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->